Key result
Activate injury prevention program linked to ~59% fewer training injuries in schoolboy rugby.
Why the study?
Although the Activate exercise programme was known to be efficacious, its implementation and effectiveness in the applied setting needed assessment.
Does the Activate injury prevention exercise programme reduce injury incidence and burden in English schoolboy rugby union players?
Observational
Yes
Does the Activate injury prevention exercise programme reduce injury incidence and burden in English schoolboy rugby union players?
Effect estimate: RR 0.41 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.97)
The Activate injury prevention exercise programme is effective at reducing training and match injury incidence in schoolboy rugby union players, with higher adherence yielding greater benefits.
May support training injury reduction in schoolboy rugby; leaves open causal confirmation via randomized trials.
Objective The efficacious Activate injury prevention exercise programme has been shown to prevent injuries in English schoolboy rugby union. There is now a need to assess the implementation and effectiveness of Activate in the applie setting. Methods This quasi-experimental study used a 24-hour time-loss injury definition to calculate incidence (/1000 hours) and burden (days lost/1000 hours) for individuals whose teams adopted Activate (used Activate during season) versus non-adopters. The dose-response relationship of varying levels of Activate adherence (median Activate sessions per week) was also assessed. Player-level rugby exposure, sessional Activate adoption and injury reports were recorded by school gatekeepers. Rate ratios (RR), adjusted by cluster (team), were calculated using backwards stepwise Poisson regression to compare rates between adoption and adherence groups. Results Individuals in teams adopting Activate had a 23% lower match injury incidence (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.07), 59% lower training injury incidence (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.97) and 26% lower match injury burden (95% CI 0.46 to 1.20) than individuals on non-adopting teams. Individuals with high Activate adherence (≥3 sessions per week) had a 67% lower training injury incidence (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.91) and a 32% lower match injury incidence (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.92) than individuals with low adherence (<1 session per week). While 65% of teams adopted Activate during the season, only one team used Activate three times per week, using whole phases and programme progressions. Conclusion Activate is effective at preventing injury in English schoolboy rugby. Attention should focus on factors influencing programme uptake and implementation, ensuring Activate can have maximal benefit.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Barden et al. (2022) conducted an observational in Rugby injuries. Activate injury prevention exercise programme vs. Non-adopting teams was evaluated on Training injury incidence (/1000 hours) (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.97). Adopting the Activate injury prevention exercise programme resulted in a 59% lower training injury incidence (RR 0.41; 95% CI 0.17-0.97) compared to non-adopting teams in schoolboy rugby.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: